Training that seemed like a good idea, but then caused issues later down the line!

[Orangehorse]

I read an interesting chapter once about the use of side reins, ones with rubber in and ones without,and the author said that he started using the rubber ones until he realised that they ruined the horse as they never learned to have a consistant contact. Can't remember who it was, but a big name.

The "stirrups out = stop" is something a lot of irish horses do, I had an irish pony that would do that which could be useful at times!

 

[Festive_Felicitations]

...I've met a lot of old men and women - brilliant horsemen - who would give a great deal to have some of the horses of their youth back for a "do over" knowing what they know now because they recognise the mistakes they've made and the costs involved...

But as Baydale's sig says, "Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." (Samuel Beckett)

So true! I'm not even old or brilliant (yet ) but knowing what I do today I'd give anything to have my time with Beau over again! I know a lot of the problems we have today are my fault and feel sorry for him that I have to try and amend them now (while I'm sure messing other things up).

 

[LaurenM]

Interesting thread! Wouldn't necessarily say the foot out of stirrups = stop is an Irish thing though as most horses I have ridden have done this! I think its more to do with feet out of stirrups = work over hence stop!

I've got an ex polo horse so she's used to being ridden with high hands thus high neck carriage. It's taken a good few weeks for her to bring her head down. Just need to begin to ask her to work into the scary contact and engage from behind!! Argh!! Left lead canter is another no no - no counter canter or flying changes for us (just yet)!

 

[foxy1]

This is the best thread I've read on here in months. I'm taking notes!

 

[stencilface]

Re your instructors. . .it works exactly the same way for teaching! Every time I've learned something new, I've felt like I should write letters of apologies to former students! God help the poor souls I taught when I was in my 20s!

I can see this, however having been back and had a lesson for some unknown reason with an old PC instructor, she hadn't changed one bit, she was still awful, luckily enough now I know better!

 

[kerilli]

I read an interesting chapter once about the use of side reins, ones with rubber in and ones without,and the author said that he started using the rubber ones until he realised that they ruined the horse as they never learned to have a consistant contact. Can't remember who it was, but a big name.

my trainer will only use full-leather side-reins, for exactly that reason.

 

[Tnavas]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangehorse
I read an interesting chapter once about the use of side reins, ones with rubber in and ones without,and the author said that he started using the rubber ones until he realised that they ruined the horse as they never learned to have a consistant contact. Can't remember who it was, but a big name.

my trainer will only use full-leather side-reins, for exactly that reason.

Ditto Orangehorse - side reins with donuts are even worse. Mine are full leather had to have them specially made as all that was available were elasticated ones. Also the reason I don't like the reins that are for sale for the rider that have elastic inserts in them.

 

[LEC]

Interesting with PC instructors (I have done a lot in the system recently!) There are two types those who are happy to keep progressing and learning and doing PC is just a part of the general teaching they do and those who do the bare minimum of CPD and have stopped keeping up years ago so actually there training methods have not changed.

The main change in teaching is that you should not be telling but asking open questions in order to help the rider learn feel and develop it. Many PC instructors have not grasped this. I remember years ago never being taught about engagement (or maybe I was not listening!) and riding forwards into the hand.

I will not go to any instructor who is not competing or involved in the competition scene because methods and ideas change. If you think about eventing it is scary the amount of stuff that is now filtered down from Ken Clawson and Yogi Breisner. This never used to happen.

 

[TarrSteps]

I can see this, however having been back and had a lesson for some unknown reason with an old PC instructor, she hadn't changed one bit, she was still awful, luckily enough now I know better!

Fair enough. Some people just suck.

In my case, I suspect it's about equal when I look back. I was taught by people I couldn't begin to utilise effectively and I'd love to go back knowing what I know now and touch base with them again. I was also taught by a lot of people who were, like your PC instructor, just bad! And I bet they're still bad!

Which kind of goes back to my original point - if you ARE making mistakes but you realise it and seek to make amends, you will only improve. If you are making mistakes and you don't want to know, you'll keep right on making them.

 

[TarrSteps]

I will not go to any instructor who is not competing or involved in the competition scene because methods and ideas change. If you think about eventing it is scary the amount of stuff that is now filtered down from Ken Clawson and Yogi Breisner. This never used to happen.

I'm curious about this statement . . . are you saying things never used to filter down? Or that Ken and Yogi are now the main "primary sources" for most eventing trainers? Or that progression of ideas is a new concept?

People like Lars Sederholm and Lady Hugh Russell had HUGE influence on earlier generations - they taught the people (or they taught the people who taught the people) who have huge influence now. You can draw a direct line from people like Littauer to modern "big name trainers" often with only a few degrees of separation.

What interests me is how LITTLE things change. You referenced AP's book on the other thread - that's an OLD book now! Riding is such a traditional art, everyone's knowledge is built on what's come before. I just finished reading some of Harry Boldt's work and it was a source of real excitement to me that I'd been taught by someone who saw him in action and was taught by some of his students. (I will say from what I've read and seen, there has actually been historically LESS traditional European influence in the UK than in, say North America, which is much more a mix of Continental Schools (historically more French for jumping, at least), Old English Hunting Seat, and a dollop of Stock seat and other "New World" schools.)

That said, I do take the point that COMPETITION riding should be taught by people with intimate competition knowledge. There have been more progressions in competition - everything from safety to technicality to fashion - than in riding in general in the past 20 years and an up to date influence is essential.

 

[imr]

Ah right, very similar to what i've been taught then, thanks for the clarification.

I think this thread shows jsut how hard it can be to convey in words the difference between different aids. Having read PS explanation I would say its as good a description in words of the difference between the aids for the two movements as any. That said, whenever you are teaching a horse a new thing it is likely that it may take a few attempts for you to get what you want because the horse may not be sure and you arent sure exactly how you need to ask on that particular horse, because they are all different and you may need a more robust aid (or not) for example. I wouldnt be surprised if somethimes half pass attempts become canter but I wouldnt expect it to last, and the changes meaning counter canter becomes tricky for a bit is so common its untrue. Its also true that not everyone teaches canter aid the same way (see kyra k for example) and so that doesnt help either....